[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 133 (Friday, July 11, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37192-37194]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-18287]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[A-570-822]
Certain Helical Spring Lock Washers From the People's Republic of
China; Preliminary Results of Antidumping Duty Administrative Review
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of preliminary results of antidumping duty
administrative review.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) is conducting an
administrative review of the antidumping duty order on certain helical
spring lock washers (HSLWs) from the People's Republic of China (PRC)
in response to requests submitted by the petitioner, Shakeproof
Industrial Products Division of Illinois Tool Works (SIP), and by the
respondent, Zhejiang Wanxin Group Co., Ltd., (ZWG). This review covers
shipments of the subject merchandise to the United States during the
period October 1, 1995 through September 30, 1996.
We have preliminarily determined that sales have been made below
normal value (NV). If these preliminary results are adopted in our
final results, we will instruct the U.S. Customs Service to assess
antidumping duties equal to the difference between the export price and
NV.
Interested parties are invited to comment on these preliminary
results. Parties who submit argument are requested to submit with each
argument (1) a statement of the issue and (2) a brief summary of the
argument.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 11, 1997.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tamara Underwood, Donald Little, or
Maureen Flannery, Import Administration, International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230; telephone (202) 482-
4733.
Applicable Statute
Unless otherwise indicated, all citations to the statute are
references to the provisions effective January 1, 1995, the effective
dated of the amendments made to the Tariff Act of 1930 (the Act) by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA). In addition, unless otherwise
indicated, all citations to the Department's regulations are to the
regulations as amended by the interim regulations published in the
Federal Register on May 11, 1995 (60 FR 25130).
Background
On October 19, 1993, the Department published the antidumping duty
order on HSLWs from the PRC in the Federal Register (58 FR 53914). On
October 1, 1996, the Department published a notice in the Federal
Register (61 FR 51259) notifying interested parties of the opportunity
to request an administrative review of the antidumping duty order on
HSLWs from the PRC. On October 30 and 31, 1996, in accordance with 19
CFR 353.22 (a), the petitioner and ZWG, respectively, requested that
the Department conduct an administrative review of ZWG, also known as
Hangzhou Spring Washer Plant. The notice of initiation of this
administrative review was published on November 15, 1996 in the Federal
Register (61 FR 58513). The Department is conducting this
administrative review in accordance with Section 751 of the Act.
Scope of Review
The products covered by this review are HSLWs of carbon steel, of
carbon alloy steel, or of stainless steel, heat-treated or non-heat-
treated, plated or non-plated, with ends that are off-line. HSLWs are
designed to: (1) Function as a spring to compensate for developed
looseness between the component parts of a fastened assembly; (2)
distribute the load over a larger area for screws or bolts; and (3)
provide a hardened bearing surface.
The scope does not include internal or external tooth washers, nor
does it include spring lock washers made of other metals, such as
copper.
HSLWs subject to this review are currently classifiable under
subheading 7318.21.0030 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (HTS). Although the HTS subheading is provided for convenience
and Customs purposes, the written description of the scope of this
proceeding is dispositive.
This review covers the period October 1, 1995 through September 30,
1996.
Separate Rates Determination
To establish whether a company operating in a state-controlled
economy is sufficiently independent to be entitled to a separate rate,
the Department analyzes each exporting entity under the test
established in the Final Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair
Value: Sparklers from the People's Republic of China (56 FR 20588, May
6, 1991) (Sparklers), as amplified by the Final Determination of Sales
at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from the People's Republic of
China (59 FR 22585, May 2, 1994) (Silicon Carbide). Under this policy,
[[Page 37193]]
exporters in the non-market economies (NMEs) are entitled to separate,
company-specific margins when they can demonstrate an absence of
government control, both in law and in fact, with respect to export
activities. Evidence supporting, though not requiring, a finding of de
jure absence of government control over export activities includes: (1)
An absence of restrictive stipulations associated with an individual
exporter's business and export licenses; (2) any legislative enactments
decentralizing control of companies; and (3) any other formal measures
by the government decentralizing control of companies. De facto absence
of government control over exports is based on four factors: (1)
Whether each exporter sets its own export prices independently of the
government and without the approval of a government authority; (2)
whether each exporter retains the proceeds from its sales and makes
independent decisions regarding the disposition of profits or financing
of losses; (3) whether each exporter has the authority to negotiate and
sign contracts and other agreements; and (4) whether each exporter has
autonomy from the government regarding the selection of management.
In the first and second administrative reviews covering the periods
October 15, 1993 through September 30, 1994 and October 1, 1994 through
September 30, 1995, respectively, we determined that ZWG merited a
separate rate. We have found that the evidence on the record of this
review also demonstrates an absence of government control, both in law
and in fact, with respect to ZWG's exports according to the criteria
identified in Sparklers, and an absence of government control with
respect to the additional criteria identified in Silicon Carbide.
Because we determined that ZWG merited a separate rate under the
criteria set forth in Sparklers and Silicon Carbide, and because no
evidence was put on the record of this review demonstrating that ZWG
does not merit a separate rate for this review, we continue to assign
ZWG a separate rate.
Export Price
For sales made by ZWG we used export price, in accordance with
section 772(a) of the Act, because the subject merchandise was sold to
unrelated purchasers in the United States prior to importation into the
United States.
We calculated export price based on the price to unrelated
purchasers. We deducted an amount, when appropriate, for foreign inland
freight, brokerage and handling, ocean freight, and marine insurance.
We valued foreign inland freight, brokerage and handling, ocean
freight, and marine insurance using surrogate data based on Indian
costs. We selected India as the surrogate country for the reasons
explained in the ``Normal Value'' section of this notice.
Normal Value
For companies located in NME countries, section 773(c) (1) of the
Act provides that the Department shall determine NV using a factors-of-
production methodology if (1) the merchandise is exported from an NME
country, and (2) the information does not permit the calculation of NV
using home-market prices, third-country prices, or constructed value
under section 773(a) of the Act.
We calculated NV based on factors of production in accordance with
section 773(c)(4) of the Act and section 353.52(c) of our regulations.
We determined that India is comparable to the PRC in terms of (1) per
capita gross national product (GNP), (2) the growth rate in per capita
GNP, and (3) the national distribution of labor. In addition, India is
a significant producer of comparable merchandise. Therefore, for this
review, we chose India as a comparable surrogate on the basis of the
above criteria, and have used publicly available information relating
to India to value the various factors of production. (See memorandum to
Maureen Flannery from David Mueller, dated January 29, 1997, ``Certain
Helical Spring Lock Washers from the PRC: Nonmarket Economy Status and
Surrogate Country Selection,'' and memorandum to the file from Tamara
Underwood, dated July 3, 1997, ``India Selected as Surrogate Country
for Factors Valuation in the Third Administrative Review of the
Antidumping Order on Certain Helical Spring Lock Washers from the
People's Republic of China,'' which are in the file in the Central
Records Unit (room B099 of the Main Commerce building).)
We valued the factors of production as follows:
For carbon steel wire rod values, we used the average cost
per metric ton of carbon steel wire rods imported from the United
Kingdom by ZWG during the period of review. We made further adjustments
to account for the freight costs incurred between the port and ZWG.
For the value of chemicals used in the production and
plating process of HSLWs, we used per kilogram values obtained from the
Indian publication Chemical Weekly and from the Monthly Statistics of
the Foreign Trade of India-Imports (MFTI). We adjusted to account for
freight costs incurred between the supplier and ZWG.
For labor values, we used data from the Yearbook of Labor
Statistics (YLS) published by the United Nations. Data from the YLS is
not differentiated by skill level, or by whether the labor is direct or
indirect. Thus, following the method established in Preliminary
Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Polyvinyl Alcohol from
the People's Republic of China, (60 FR 52647, October 10, 1995), we
applied a single labor value to all reported labor factors, including
indirect labor. We adjusted these rates to reflect the average
inflation throughout the POR using the consumer price indices (CPI)
published by the IMF.
For factory overhead, selling, general, and administrative
expenses, and profit values, we used information from the April 1995
Reserve Bank of India Bulletin for the Indian industry group
``Processing and Manufacturing: Metals, Chemicals, and Products
Thereof.'' From this information, we were able to determine factory
overhead as a percentage of the total cost of manufacturing, SG&A as a
percentage of the total cost of manufacturing, and the profit rate as a
percentage of the cost of manufacturing plus SG&A.
For packing materials values, we used the per kilogram
values obtained from the MFTI. Where necessary, we adjusted these
values to reflect inflation through the POR using WPI published by the
IMF. We made further adjustments to account for freight costs incurred
between the PRC supplier and ZWG.
To value coal, we used a per kilogram value obtained from
the MFTI. We adjusted this value to reflect inflation through the POR
using WPI published by the IMF. We made further adjustments to account
for freight costs incurred between the supplier and ZWG.
To value electricity, we used the price of electricity for
1995 reported in the Confederation of Indian Industries Handbook of
Statistics. We adjusted the value to reflect inflation through the POR
using WPI published by the IMF.
To value water, we used the November 1993 Water Utilities
Data Book for the Asian and Pacific Region published by the Asian
Development Bank. We adjusted the value to reflect inflation through
the POR using WPI published by the IMF.
To value truck freight rates, we used a rate derived from
April 20, 1994 issue of The Times of India. We adjusted the rate to
reflect inflation through the POR using WPI published by the IMF.
[[Page 37194]]
To value shipping freight, we used a rate reported to the
Department in the August 1993 cable from the U.S. Embassy in India
which was submitted for and used in the Final Determination of Sales at
Less Than Fair Value: Certain Helical Spring Lock Washers from the
People's Republic of China (58 FR 48833, September 20, 1993). We
adjusted the rate to reflect inflation through the POR using WPI
published by the IMF.
Currency Conversion
We made currency conversions pursuant to section 353.60 of the
Department's regulations at the rates certified by the Federal Reserve
Bank.
Preliminary Results of Review
We preliminarily determine that the following dumping margin
exists:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Margin
Manufacturer/exporter Time period (percent)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zhejiang Wanxin Group Co., Ltd.......... 10/01/95-09/30/96 13.64
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Parties to the proceeding may request disclosure within 5 days of
the date of publication of this notice in accordance with 19 CFR
353.28. Any interested party may request a hearing within 10 days of
publication in accordance with 19 CFR 353.38 (b). Any hearing, if
requested, will be held 44 days after the publication of this notice,
or the first workday thereafter. Interested parties may submit case
briefs within 30 days of the date of publication of this notice in
accordance with 19 CFR 353.38 (c). Rebuttal briefs, which must be
limited to issues raised in the case briefs, may be filed not later
than 37 days after the date of publication. The Department will publish
a notice of the final results of this administrative review, which will
include the results of its analysis of issues raised in any such
comments.
The Department shall determine, and the U.S. Customs Service shall
assess, antidumping duties on all appropriate entries.
Individual differences between export price and NV may vary from
the percentage stated above for ZWG. The Department will issue
appraisement instructions directly to the U.S. Customs Service.
Furthermore, the following deposit rates will be effective upon
publication of the final results of this administrative review for all
shipments of HSLWs from the PRC entered, or withdrawn from warehouse
for consumption on or after the publication date, as provided for by
section 751 (a) (2) (C) of the Act: (1) For ZWG, which has a separate
rate, the cash deposit rate will be the company-specific rate
established in the final results of this administrative review; (2) for
all other PRC exporters, the cash deposit rate will be the PRC rate,
which is 128.63; and (3) for non-PRC exporters of subject merchandise
from the PRC, the cash deposit rate will be the rate applicable to the
PRC supplier of that exporter.
These deposit rates, when imposed, shall remain in effect until
publication of the final results of the next administrative review.
This notice also serves as a preliminary reminder to importers of
their responsibility under 19 CFR 353.26 to file a certificate
regarding the reimbursement of antidumping duties prior to liquidation
of the relevant entries during this review period. Failure to comply
with this requirement could result in the Secretary's presumption that
reimbursement of antidumping duties occurred and the subsequent
assessment of double antidumping duties.
This administrative review and notice are in accordance with
section 751 (a)(1) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)(1)) and 19 CFR 353.22.
Dated: July 3, 1997.
Joseph A. Spetrini,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 97-18287 Filed 7-10-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P